What is a Highly Qualified Teacher? Congress
Weighs In
Taken
from CEC Today published 1-12-11 (Carrie Winslow)
Starting in 2002 with the passage of the No
Child Left Behind Act, federal law has defined a highly qualified teacher in a
specific way. While the definition in NCLB of highly qualified,
(definition 23) differentiates between elementary teachers, secondary teachers
and those in charter schools, in general the Act requires that “the
teacher has obtained full State certification as a teacher (including
certification obtained through alternative routes to certification)…”
But the phrase “certification
obtained through alternative routes” has become a lightening rod of controversy
in recent days due to a lawsuit and a quick congressional fix. According
to US Department of
Education regulations issued shortly after NCLB passed, to meet
this requirement a teacher could either (1) have obtained certification through
an alternative route program or (2) be “participating in an alternative route to
certification program … [and] demonstrate satisfactory progress
toward full certification as prescribed by the State.”
In 2008, advocacy groups in
California sued the US Department of Education alleging this regulation
improperly expanded Congress’s definition and thus, gave states a loophole – in essence, they could put
teachers in the classroom before they had completed their alternative route
program and still meet NCLB’s highly qualified requirements. Additionally, the lawsuit
presented evidence that teachers in alternative route programs tend to be in
schools with the most need and disproportionately teaching students of color
and students with disabilities. This past fall, the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals found for the advocates and ruled that the Department of Education’s regulation improperly
expanded Congress’s definition.
Then, in response to this change, in the
very end of December just as Congress was leaving town for its winter break, it
decided to amend Title I of NCLB to allow teachers who have merely enrolled in
alternative route programs to be deemed highly qualified. It added this
amendment to a Continuing Resolution – legislation funding the government, and
made the Department of Education’s expanded definition law effective through
2013.
CEC is concerned that deeming anyone who is
in the midst of their alternative route program as “highly
qualified” does not serve the goal of providing students – with
or without disabilities – the education they deserve. CEC is
not opposed to alternative route programs. Indeed, special education has been
plagued by personnel shortages and ignoring alternative route programs would
turn a blind eye to the field’s very real need. But, CEC has always
called for alternative route programs to be rigorous and evidence based.
To address this change and advocate for
proactive real solutions, CEC has met with members of the Senate and House
education committees to explain our concerns and present evidence, with the
help of CEC member and personnel preparation expert Dr. Mary Brownell that
demonstrates students with disabilities achieve higher gains with well prepared
instructors. CEC is continuing to meet with the community and congressional
staff to provide information and advocate for real, equitable and high
standards for all teachers.